In the fall, 2002, the federal government of the United States instituted a new rule to the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), allowing “unborn children” to qualify for health benefits. Supporters of this change maintained that it was an important step forward in improving prenatal care. This includes the fetuses of women who are illegal immigrants, although the women themselves and their immigrant children not born in the United States are not covered by such insurance. Proponents of the new ruling point out that, once these fetuses are born, they will be U. S. citizens if they are born in the United States.

Supporters of this rule say this is not a issue about abortion at all, but about prenatal care. Indeed, they maintain that abortion-rights activists who oppose this rule are in fact diminishing the quality of prenatal care that immigrant women would receive.

Questions: Should federally-funded health care benefits be extended to fetuses or unborn children? (Note that the same in which this question is phrased can prejudice the outcome.) Why or why not? What implications does your view on this issue have for your views on abortion?